Vehicular cycling

Vehicular cycling has had roughly 40 years of real world testing, and has clearly been detrimental to cycling in the United States. The philosophy of Vehicular cycling has been, as Furth describes, very influential in terms of shaping the relationship between Americans and cycling. Sadly, the VC philosophy has resulted in very small overall numbers of cyclists, higher crash rates, and generally stressful experiences cycling in many parts of the United States. One could say that vehicular cycling has created barriers to cycling for most people, even though those who feel comfortable ‘behaving like a vehicle’ are in the minority. But, as Furth contends, mainstream America is ‘traffic intolerant’ in terms of riding a bicycle on busy roads, so in reality, the VC philosophy has ensured a very small percentage primarily male cyclists a place on American roads.

Importantly, as they advanced their agenda amongst cycling advocates, the VC crowd forgot one very critical aspect – the education of NON-CYCLISTS, i.e. the more powerful road users, as to any rights cyclists have in terms of riding on the roads. More specifically, the VC philosophy expects that drivers will understand and accept what cyclists are doing as they ‘behave like vehicles’ and take the lane, for example. In their rush to forego separated bike paths or any sort of cycling infrastructure, they relegated cycling to a virtual unknown form of road user, because there is no evidence of their place in vehicular traffic on the roadway. Other than the occasional ‘Share the Road’ sign, which many believe is unclear and even counterproductive, there is not much evidence on our roads that would lead automobile drivers to believe that anyone other than other car drivers might expect to share the space.

This has led to a great deal of misunderstanding on behalf of non-cyclists regarding cyclists using the roads, and this misunderstanding often turns to outright aggression. As cyclists on the road have no dedicated space, they are perceived as an unwelcome ‘other’, eliciting driver aggravation when they ‘slow traffic’. We in America also support very little cycling education in schools, though we are very thorough with our driving education. Despite this, we expect cyclists and drivers to know the rules and regulations as they apply to riding on public roads. For the most part, this knowledge is not passed on, bike riders become ‘scofflaw’, mostly in reaction to environments that are generally hostile to them, and without formal education cyclists are left to their own devices to create their own social ‘norms’. For example, a bike rider on a three-lane arterial with no bikes lanes jumps a red light – most drivers likely see him as another law flouting cyclist running the light because ‘they think they own the road’. But, we as cyclists know that the rider is only trying to get out ahead of traffic before the light turns green, so as not to be swallowed up by the sea of 2000 lb fast moving vehicles who only see him as an obstruction.  

Dutch road design not only includes dedicated space for both bikers and walkers, but also very clear explanation and signage guiding each type of user through the space. Additionally, schoolchildren in Holland learn how to ride at a young age, in schools. Even those who grow up not wishing to ride a bike will have had the education, and understand how bicycles, pedestrians and automobiles are expected to interact on the roads. The rights to space on the road is clear for ALL users, and does not lead to open ended confusion, misunderstanding and aggression.

Dutch road design is also guided by the idea of prioritizing safety for all users, whereas vehicular cycling, like a a large portion of American road design, centers around 'effectiveness', 'efficiency', and 'speed'. These selective priorities do not appeal to everyone. Additionally, Dutch design accepts the fact that humans are fallible and make mistakes, and works to prevent those mistakes from being fatal through changes in the road environment. Vehicular cycling enthusiasts think they are too smart to be subject to sloppy driving or bike riding. 

Thankfully, the tide appears to be turning against the philosophy of vehicular cycling. We have many things to work on at home, and I welcome the day when we can truly dispatch this set of ideas to the history books.